C Satish v. Mr.Vishnu S Warrier

HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE RAGHVENDRA SINGH CHAUHAN AND THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE A. ABHISHEK REDDY C.C. No. 1046 of 2019 Date: 30.10.2019 Between:

C. Satish ... Petitioner and Mr. Vishnu S Warrier, I.P.S., Superintendent of Police, Adilabad.

...Respondent

Counsel for the petitioner:

Mr. K. Rama Subba Rao Counsel for the respondent:

Special Government Pleader The Court made the following:

HCJ & AAR, J C.C. No.1046 of 2019 Dt: 30.10.2019 ORDER: (per the Hon'ble the Chief Justice Sri Raghvendra Singh Chauhan) Mr. C. Satish, the complainant, has filed the present contempt petition inter alia on the ground that the order dated 08.06.2018, passed by a learned Division Bench of this Court in W.P.No.1488 of 2014, which was disposed of along with W.P.No.35460 of 2013 and batch, has not been complied with by the alleged contemnor.

By order dated 08.06.2018, the learned Division Bench had directed that the complainant be subjected to a physical test to ascertain his fitness before he is being re-inducted into service as Home Guard.

Mr. S. Sharath Kumar, the learned Special Government Pleader, informs this Court that in fact the complainant and others were subjected to a physical test on 23.03.2019. However, the complainant failed to qualify the test. Therefore, the complainant cannot be re-inducted into service. But, nonetheless, the direction issued by the learned Division Bench to subject the complainant to a physical test has been carried out. Hence, no contempt is made out. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the complainant submits that the learned Division Bench had directed that "an objective and transparent procedure should be adopted by the State and its police officials with regard to the physical test to be undertaken by the complainant." However, the complainant and others were subjected to a physical test meant for the police constables, who at the initial stage of selection are young men. Therefore, an

HCJ & AAR, J C.C. No.1046 of 2019 Dt: 30.10.2019 objective and transparent procedure has not been adopted by the alleged contemnor. Hence, contempt is made out. Heard the learned counsel for the parties.

In case the complainant is aggrieved by his disqualification, he has ample remedies to challenge the same. However, as the alleged contemnor has already subjected the complainant to a physical test, the order dated 08.06.2018, has been complied with. Thus, no contempt is made out.

For the reasons stated above, this Court does not find any merit in the contempt case. It is, hereby, dismissed. As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions, pending if any, also stand dismissed as infructuous.

________________________________________ (RAGHVENDRA SINGH CHAUHAN, CJ) _____________________________ (A. ABHISHEK REDDY, J) Date: 30.10.2019 va